Andrew Kerekes

The respondents, parents of a diabetic child, withheld his prescribed insulin due to their religious belief in faith healing, resulting in the child's death.

They were convicted of manslaughter by criminal negligence.

The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial due to errors in the jury charge regarding the burden of proof.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, affirming the order for a new trial.

The Court split on the appropriate test for criminal negligence under s. 202 of the Criminal Code, with half favouring an objective standard and half favouring a subjective standard requiring advertence to the risk.

The Crown appealed an acquittal on charges of break, enter and theft.

The trial judge found that the respondents were arbitrarily detained contrary to s. 9 of the Charter and excluded the resulting evidence (statements, stolen goods, fingerprints) under s. 24(2).

The Court of Appeal upheld the exclusion.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, holding that absent an error of law or unreasonable finding, it should not substitute its opinion for that of the courts below on a s. 24(2) application.